list_hats

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden. It uses the verb 'Browse', which implies a read-only operation, and explains what Intelligence Packs are. However, it doesn't explicitly state the return format or that it's a safe list operation, beyond the verb. This is adequate but not rich.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two concise sentences. The first sentence front-loads the purpose, and the second adds useful context about what Intelligence Packs are, without unnecessary fluff. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple no-parameter list tool, the description provides sufficient context. It explains what the tool does and what the items are. It doesn't explicitly say it returns a list, but that is naturally implied. No output schema exists, so the description could have been more explicit about the return value, but the simplicity keeps this from being a major gap.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

There are zero parameters, so the baseline is 4. The description doesn't need to add param info, and it doesn't. The schema has no properties, so the description correctly doesn't attempt to describe any.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool's purpose with a specific verb ('Browse') and resource ('available Intelligence Packs (Specialist Hats)'). It distinguishes itself from the sibling tool 'wear_hat' by focusing on browsing rather than activation.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The phrase 'Browse available' implies when to use this tool (to see what hats are available). While it doesn't explicitly name alternatives, the sibling 'wear_hat' serves a different function, so the context is clear. No explicit exclusions or when-not-to-use, but adequate.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.